Any chance to add the missing user avatars from the last couple of DLCs?
- 2
- 1
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
We're investigating this issue. Unfortunately, we're not going to have it out with the next patch but hopefully soon thereafter.Hello,
Will this bug be fixed in the near future?
Nuclear missiles instantly disappear for AI
Summary Nuclear missiles instantly disappear for AI Platform Steam Operating System Windows 11 Game Version 1.15 (Götterdämmerung) Enabled DLC All of the above Do you have mods enabled? No Description Nuclear ICBM's instantly disappear for...forum.paradoxplaza.com
Similar to the confirmed issue with only a single division commander pic for Iran, there is a very similar problem for Iranian admirals - each new one you promote seems to share the portrait with the historic(?) starting admiral Azad Hashemi:
forum.paradoxplaza.com
Iran with the GoE DLC has/uses only one portrait for promoted admirals (which is worse than the situation w/o the DLC...)
Summary Iran with the GoE DLC has/uses only one portrait for promoted admirals (which is worse than the situation w/o the DLC...) Platform Steam Operating System Windows 10 Game Version 1.16.5 (beta) Enabled DLC All of the above Do you have...
- 2
Really appreciated your feedback, and your idea of being able to add a note to the design I've added today. I've not had a chance to look into the specific bug you mentioned, I will try to do that tomorrow.
Now there is a new button, and the note shows up as part of the tooltip (See my amazing "testtest" note for future self)
- 10
- 5
Azad Hashemi is made up.Similar to the confirmed issue with only a single division commander pic for Iran, there is a very similar problem for Iranian admirals - each new one you promote seems to share the portrait with the historic(?) starting admiral Azad Hashemi:
Iran with the GoE DLC has/uses only one portrait for promoted admirals (which is worse than the situation w/o the DLC...)
Summary Iran with the GoE DLC has/uses only one portrait for promoted admirals (which is worse than the situation w/o the DLC...) Platform Steam Operating System Windows 10 Game Version 1.16.5 (beta) Enabled DLC All of the above Do you have...
- 4
A bit off topic but wouldnt it be good to grant the italian east africa puppet (the one formed by decision) the same focus tree the italian ethiopia puppet gets when you form them in the peace conference instead of the generic one.
Would be way more flavorfull and basicly no extra work for paradox
Would be way more flavorfull and basicly no extra work for paradox
- 1
- 1
- 1
I understand the decision in Blancing but could you then further add the possibility to create the Lithuanian duchy after conquering it (with its respectable claims) and also please ensure that germany cores Bialystok through the focus further consessions even if Russia took east Poland including bialystok
I've already mentioned it before, but could you please restore escape (or something else) as a hotkey in the focus completion screen? Upon focus completion, escape would take you to the focus tree.
Bonus points if you add a hotkey to the research completion screen.
Bonus points if you add a hotkey to the research completion screen.
- 1
Spread the revolution to neighboring countries?) Nepal, Bhutan, etc.
- 1
seems to be nice patch, however I hope beside adding new generals for Iran, we would finally see adding new portrait arts for field officers which is currently only one.
by the way, these focuses need to get fixed:
- focus "develop major settlements" should target Tehran and East Azerbaijan, currently it's Tehran and West Azerbaijan, which is wrong.
- the hermand river issue, if Afghanistan rejects the demand, the negative impact will remain until the end of the game! even after annexing Afghanistan this is meaningless when you own the source of issue!
- there should be some decisions added in order to increase stability and war support for Iran, specially war support which has very limited max and there is no option to increase it in decisions at mid -game.
- Iran had airplane factory and was producing planes before WW2 so it should have the small plane and engine tech at the start of the game!
- as I read at year 1937 Iran had worlds 8th Iron production (and now has rich mines of all in-game resources) so having only oil is not accurate or correct. it should have more resrources specially much more steel (in Tabriz and Isfahan).
- and as Turkey, the focus "unite Azeri diaspora" even after recent change still doesn't work properly! however the East Azerbaijan is added now but doesn't get cores on Daghestan and Khuzestan! however to have it more accurate in fixing this one I suggest to remove Khuzestan and add Hamedan to the focus, which is culturally correct.
by the way, these focuses need to get fixed:
- focus "develop major settlements" should target Tehran and East Azerbaijan, currently it's Tehran and West Azerbaijan, which is wrong.
- the hermand river issue, if Afghanistan rejects the demand, the negative impact will remain until the end of the game! even after annexing Afghanistan this is meaningless when you own the source of issue!
- there should be some decisions added in order to increase stability and war support for Iran, specially war support which has very limited max and there is no option to increase it in decisions at mid -game.
- Iran had airplane factory and was producing planes before WW2 so it should have the small plane and engine tech at the start of the game!
- as I read at year 1937 Iran had worlds 8th Iron production (and now has rich mines of all in-game resources) so having only oil is not accurate or correct. it should have more resrources specially much more steel (in Tabriz and Isfahan).
- and as Turkey, the focus "unite Azeri diaspora" even after recent change still doesn't work properly! however the East Azerbaijan is added now but doesn't get cores on Daghestan and Khuzestan! however to have it more accurate in fixing this one I suggest to remove Khuzestan and add Hamedan to the focus, which is culturally correct.
Last edited:
- 2
Yes
First a focus with war goals of topple government against monarchies of Himalaya (Tibet, Bhutan, Nepal)
The second against Afghanistan and Iran.
Maybe Siam could be included in a third focus with others which give you claims on British occupation zones like Celian and the possibility of rooting resistance in French Indochina, the Dutch East Indies and British Malaya.
Last edited:
I've finished up a Democratic Iran path. It's a bit better, but still needs some improvement.
- There is still no way to get rid of the the national spirits "Kurdish Resistance" and "Azerbaijani Resistance" as Democratic Iran. There are two possible suggestions to address this.
- A focus named "Grant Regional Autonomy" that removes these two national spirits but gives Kurdish and Azerbaijani states a Catalonia-esque modifer that reduces the manpower and available resources from those states. OR A focus named "Enshrine Minority Protections" that removes the two national spirits and grants a new national spirit "Minority Protections" (+10% Stability, +5% Attack/Defense on Core Territory, -10% Political Power Gain)
- After taking Power, both leaders retain the "National Front" as their party. This can be quickly mended.
- Mohammad Ali Foroughi --> "Revival Party" (Hezb-e Tajaddod)(Conservative)
- Mohammad Mosaddegh --> "National Front of Iran" (Jebhy-ye Melli-ye Iran)(Liberalism)
- "Islamic Traditions" is not touched by the Islamic Republic path which feels like an oversight. I suggest upon completing "Resist Gharbzadegi", "Islamic Traditions" is modified by (+10% Stability, Research Speed -5%, Political Advisor Cost -25%, Daily Non-Aligned Support +0.02) meaning that "Islamic Traditions" would now give (+20% Stability, -15% Research Speed, Daily Non-Aligned Support +0.02)
- Meanwhile, completing "Continue Westernization" should modify "Islamic Traditions" by (-5% Stability, +10% Stability Speed, Political Advisor Cost -25%
- I would add a third political candidate for the "Election" event. I would add Mozzafar Baghai as a "Leftist" candidate (leading the "Toilers Party" (Hezb-e Zahmaatkasan-e Mellat-e Iran). I would also add the party's co-founder, Khalil Maleki as a "Socialist Intellectual" that grants (+5% Research Speed, +0.02 Daily Communist, +0.02 Daily Democratic Support)
- Mossadegh's trait should changed to "Anti-Royalist" (-0.05 Daily Non-Aligned Support, Acceptance of Non-Aligned Diplomacy -50).
- There is still no way to get rid of the the national spirits "Kurdish Resistance" and "Azerbaijani Resistance" as Democratic Iran. There are two possible suggestions to address this.
- A focus named "Grant Regional Autonomy" that removes these two national spirits but gives Kurdish and Azerbaijani states a Catalonia-esque modifer that reduces the manpower and available resources from those states. OR A focus named "Enshrine Minority Protections" that removes the two national spirits and grants a new national spirit "Minority Protections" (+10% Stability, +5% Attack/Defense on Core Territory, -10% Political Power Gain)
- After taking Power, both leaders retain the "National Front" as their party. This can be quickly mended.
- Mohammad Ali Foroughi --> "Revival Party" (Hezb-e Tajaddod)(Conservative)
- Mohammad Mosaddegh --> "National Front of Iran" (Jebhy-ye Melli-ye Iran)(Liberalism)
- "Islamic Traditions" is not touched by the Islamic Republic path which feels like an oversight. I suggest upon completing "Resist Gharbzadegi", "Islamic Traditions" is modified by (+10% Stability, Research Speed -5%, Political Advisor Cost -25%, Daily Non-Aligned Support +0.02) meaning that "Islamic Traditions" would now give (+20% Stability, -15% Research Speed, Daily Non-Aligned Support +0.02)
- Meanwhile, completing "Continue Westernization" should modify "Islamic Traditions" by (-5% Stability, +10% Stability Speed, Political Advisor Cost -25%
- I would add a third political candidate for the "Election" event. I would add Mozzafar Baghai as a "Leftist" candidate (leading the "Toilers Party" (Hezb-e Zahmaatkasan-e Mellat-e Iran). I would also add the party's co-founder, Khalil Maleki as a "Socialist Intellectual" that grants (+5% Research Speed, +0.02 Daily Communist, +0.02 Daily Democratic Support)
- Mossadegh's trait should changed to "Anti-Royalist" (-0.05 Daily Non-Aligned Support, Acceptance of Non-Aligned Diplomacy -50).
- 1
I've played a lot with the tweaked trees, but I feel like this doesn't even really begin to fix the dlc for me. Just from playing Iran alone, the focuses are all far too long no matter the branch, with not nearly good enough rewards. (ie 70 day focuses for 2 civs, etc). It feels like at minimum most focuses either need to be bumped down in length significantly or have additional effects/spirits added to them, to make it feel more rewarding. Really though the flow of most trees just feels sluggish and unrewarding, I think all their lengths need to be given a second look (Primarily Iran Iraq and Afghanistan, the Raj isn't too bad)
The structure of this DLC's countries is also inherently frustrating. Iraq having a guarantee basically restricts Iran and Afghanistan's expansion options to each other, and that's it. From then on the player is expected to fully cap the Allies as an underpowered minor (at least the ToA countries had strong trees to make it feel better, and were able to annex a fair amount of their neighbors prior to taking down the main obstacle of the game). I feel like removing the British guarantee on Iraq alone would already make it feel a little less frustrating to play this.
One unsung problem too is how nearly all the Iranian and Afghan achievements require ownership of a state rather than just occupation. The achievements generally give a solid guideline of countries to play and goals to accomplish, so this ownership requirement only exascerbates the frustrations with this DLC (It's not enough to have to conquer all the land as an underpowered minor, now you have to invade the UK and likely the US too). It just feels terrible. At minimum I think if these achievement requirements were changed to occupation rather than ownership, it'd do a lot to make the gameplay experience feel less frustrating. Most DLCs and achievements for a few years now have been using occupation rather than ownership as requirements, so this really felt like a step backwards as someone who loves getting all the achievements.
The structure of this DLC's countries is also inherently frustrating. Iraq having a guarantee basically restricts Iran and Afghanistan's expansion options to each other, and that's it. From then on the player is expected to fully cap the Allies as an underpowered minor (at least the ToA countries had strong trees to make it feel better, and were able to annex a fair amount of their neighbors prior to taking down the main obstacle of the game). I feel like removing the British guarantee on Iraq alone would already make it feel a little less frustrating to play this.
One unsung problem too is how nearly all the Iranian and Afghan achievements require ownership of a state rather than just occupation. The achievements generally give a solid guideline of countries to play and goals to accomplish, so this ownership requirement only exascerbates the frustrations with this DLC (It's not enough to have to conquer all the land as an underpowered minor, now you have to invade the UK and likely the US too). It just feels terrible. At minimum I think if these achievement requirements were changed to occupation rather than ownership, it'd do a lot to make the gameplay experience feel less frustrating. Most DLCs and achievements for a few years now have been using occupation rather than ownership as requirements, so this really felt like a step backwards as someone who loves getting all the achievements.
- 3
- 1
Absolutely agree with you. I hate achievements which require a minor nation to own certain provinces, especially those involving a major.
- 2
Nepal would be fair play, Pushpa Lal Shrestha and some other key members was studying in Kolkata when they formed the Communist Party of Nepal. Communism never caught on in Bhutan (other than within some Nepali immigrant communities). For alt history paths, yeah - fair game I'd say. I think co-operation with communist parties all around the region would be fair IMO.
Anyway, we have Mughal empire restoration and EIC company rule as paths, so that bar is very very low at the moment.
- 1